ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

description

  1. Current State Department List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.


    Foreign Terrorist Organizations

    Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) are foreign organizations that are designated by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended. FTO designations play a critical role in our fight against terrorism and are an effective means of curtailing support for terrorist activities and pressuring groups to get out of the terrorism business.


    List available at https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

    Posted by Nolan Rappaport

    Updated 03-01-2018 at 02:06 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. Sup. Ct,, USCIS and ICE Move Toward Police State With Actions Against Asylum-Seekers, H-1B Employers and California Immigrants. Roger Algase

    Only days after Donald Trump's venomous CPAC speech denouncing refugees as "Poisonous Snakes" (recalling Adolf Hitler's similar attacks against Jews, communists and other targeted people), the Supreme Court, in yet another split along party lines (5-3, with Justice Kagan recusing herself), ruled that there are no statutory provisions preventing the government from detaining asylum seekers and other immigrants who lack legal status or have committed minor crimes indefinitely while awaiting deportation.

    While this ruling may arguably have some justification on narrow grounds of statutory interpretation, the majority, in effect, ignored the obvious 5th amendment violation inherent in indefinite detention, and kicked that issue back to the 9th Circuit for decision.

    This virtually guarantees that in another year or two, this issue will be back in the Supreme Court, after the almost inevitable 9th Circuit decision that indefinite detention of immigrants does indeed violate the constitution.

    Meanwhile, thousands of immigrants awaiting asylum decisions or deportation will continue to languish, without the right to bail hearings, in detention centers which, while enriching private prison CEO Trump campaign donors, are also generating increasing numbers of detainee fatalities in what is coming under more and more criticism over concentration camp-like conditions.

    For further comment on this decision, Jennings v. Rodriguez, and a link to the full decision, including Justice Breyer's vigorous dissent on the grounds that the majority ignored centuries of legal precedents guaranteeing individual liberties and human rights see:

    https://www.alternet.org/immigration...-can-be-jailed

    So much for the individual liberties and human rights of "Poisonous Snake" refugees and asylum seekers in the Donald Trump Era.

    In the meantime, USCIS has issued new restrictions governing H-1B workers who are placed with third parties, which, under the pretext of allegedly combating "abuses" are likely to intimidate and discourage potential H-1B employers even further from hiring foreign skilled and professional workers in this category.

    As the memo states, these new H-1B restrictions are in furtherance of the campaign against skilled immigrants, many of whom are from Asia, contained in Trump's "Buy American, Hire American" executive order. On its face alone, this order is obviously meant to overturn the spirit, if not the letter, of the H-1B and other sections of the immigration of laws allowing for employment of foreign workers without first requiring recruitment of US workers. See:

    http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?9...at-H-1B-Abuses

    In another move showing that Trump's threats against various groups of minority immigrants need to be taken seriously, ICE has evidently followed up on Trump's recent denunciation of California's Sanctuary State policies and threat to pull ICE out of that state entirely by arresting more than 150 immigrants, most of whom had records of DUI or other relatively minor crimes, in the San Francisco Bay area.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...s-warning.html

    See also:

    http://theweek.com/speedreads/756979...nts-california

    One can be sure that in the battle between the growth of presidential power in the direction of authoritarian control over immigration on the one hand, and the basic rights of primarily Asian, African, Middle Eastern and Latin American immigrants and their US sponsors as guaranteed by a democratic society on the other, authoritarian power used in support of limiting or reducing non-white immigration is making substantial gains in Donald Trump's America.
    _______________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 30 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain H-1B and other work visas, as well as both employment and family-based green cards. Roger's email address is algaselex@gmail.com





    Updated 02-28-2018 at 02:33 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. The migrant crisis is still a growing burden for Europe. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Getty

    French President Emmanuel Macron's government introduced a bill last week that would accelerate the expulsion of migrants who do not qualify for asylum and make illegal border crossings a criminal offense punishable by one year in jail and a fine.

    And Hungary is considering a bill that would include entry bans on foreigners and restraining orders to stop Hungarians from going to border areas if they are deemed to be “supporting” or “organizing” illegal immigration.

    It isn’t surprising that European countries are adopting harsh measures to deal with the wave of asylum-seeking migrants that began in 2015. They cannot secure their borders effectively.

    The European Union (EU) established the Schengen Agreement in 1985, which abolished the internal border checks of signatory countries. This provides free and unrestricted movement between countries in the Schengen Area for the more than 400 million nationals of the 26 signatory countries, and of goods, services, and capital, in harmony with common rules for controlling external borders.

    It isn’t surprising that European countries are adopting harsh measures to deal with the wave of asylum-seeking migrants that began in 2015. They cannot secure their borders effectively.The European Union (EU) established the Schengen Agreement in 1985, which abolished the internal border checks of signatory countries. This provides free and unrestricted movement between countries in the Schengen Area for the more than 400 million nationals of the 26 signatory countries, and of goods, services, and capital, in harmony with common rules for controlling external borders
    .



    However, there is a mandatory visa requirement to enter the Schengen Zone for some non-member countries.

    Under schengen rules, signatories may reinstate internal border controls for 10 days when this has to be done immediately for "public policy or national security" reasons. If the need continues, the controls can be maintained for "renewable periods" of up to 20 days and for a maximum of two months.

    The EU’s “open borders” policy permits European states to shunt migrants from one country to the next instead of having to deal with a mass influx into its own territory.

    Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/immigrati...den-for-europe

    Published originally on The Hill.

    About the author. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.




  4. More "Animus" vs. Immigrants From Trump, While USCIS Adopts Hostile Mission Statement. How Will This Affect H-1B and Other Decisions? Roger Algase

    As the new H-1B filing season begins, both the president and the USCIS director are continuing to send unmistakable signals to immigrant communities, and agency adjudicators, that fair and unbiased decision making on petitions and applications for legal immigration benefits might not be looked on too kindly in the Donald Trump era - especially if this results in approvals.

    This could, very possibly, make last year's blizzard of often unjustified, unnecessary, and in some cases very arguably biased RFE and denial decisions in H-1B cases (such as one which I will be discussion in more detail in an upcoming comment), seem like only a curtain-raiser to what might lie ahead this year.

    And this could be the case, not only for H-1B petitions, but in USCIS cases of every variety. While the animosity toward legal immigrants in general reflected in the president's CPAC speech, which even a February 23 piece by Philip Klein in the conservative Washington Examiner called "Horrendous"

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tr...rticle/2649875

    did not deal with H-1B or skilled/professional immigrants in particular, the hostile tone of Trump's false and malicious attacks on refugees, diversity visa and family-based immigrants in that speech could very likely affect agency attitudes toward all immigrants.

    This is true especially of Trump's venomous assault on refugees, whom he compared to "snakes", (and not for the first time - this has been a recurring theme in his speeches, one which also recalls Nazi attacks against Jews, capitalists and communists). See:

    https://www.mediaite.com/online/stev...y-un-american/

    This assault on a class of immigrants who have caused remarkably few problems in the United States and who are, very arguably, among the most deserving of all, could also turn out to be an open invitation to the federal courts at some point to strike down any further actions that Trump might take against refugees, based on the same finding of "animus" against immigrants that some federal courts have relied on to invalidate Trump's Muslim ban.

    But as if this poisonous and dehumanizing attack on a category of immigrants who are among the most vulnerable and desperate for the safety and security that America has to offer of any people in the world, as well as being among the most strictly and thoroughly screened of all immigrants in the US, were not enough, Trump also launched into another one of his favorite anti-immigrants falsehoods, namely that diversity visa immigrants are allegedly picked by foreign governments intent on sending only their "worst" people to America.

    This characterization of the diversity visa lottery is so utterly devoid of truth as to be far beyond any rational discussion of immigration policy. It recalls the infamous attack against Mexican immigrants as "criminals" and "rapists" with which Trump began his presidential campaign.

    In the meantime, and very likely not by coincidence, Trump's new USCIS director has changed that agency's mission statement to eliminate the phrase "nation of immigrants", and substitute "protecting Americans" instead.

    https://www.vox.com/2018/2/22/170418...sion-statement

    While this change, of course, does not constitute policy guidance, it changes that agency's fundamental perception of immigrants - viewing them as a threat to America instead of an essential part of our nation's traditions and values.

    Ideally, one could hope that immigrant applicants and their American sponsors who are seeking legal immigration benefits for them will continue to receive fair and unbiased decisions based only on the facts, law and regulations governing each case.

    But it would be unrealistic to think that USCIS adjudicators are likely to ignore or remain uninfluenced by the constant demonizing and scapegoating against legal immigrants by the head of the government which they serve, and the apparent willingness to fall in line with the approach by the head of the agency which pays their salaries.

    These developments should be a warning to H-1B petitioners and every one else applying for legal immigration status to prepare their cases even more carefully, and advocate for them even more vigorously, than in the past. I will be providing some specific suggestions about the best ways to do this in upcoming posts to appear shortly.
    ------------------------------
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 30 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain H-1B and other work visas, as well as green cards through employment and family sponsorship. Roger's email address is
    algaselex@gmail.com

    Updated 03-02-2018 at 09:19 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Trump Doubles Down on Demand to Abolish 50 Year Old Policy of Non-Discriminatory Family Immigration as the Price for Saving Dreamers. Roger Algase

    The Hill reports on February 23, that, once again, Donald Trump has repeated his implied threats to take action against almost 800,000 Dreamers (and we all know what kind of action that means) unless immigration supporters agree to abolish the non-discriminatory family immigration system which America has had for the past half century, since 1965.

    According to many news reports, Trump's own mother, grandfather, and much more recently, parents-in-law, came to America through the same kind of "chain migration" which Trump now calls so "horrible" (in a December 29, 2017 tweet) and dangerous for America's security (in his recent SOTU speech) when people from non-European countries whose color is not as white as Trump's own family members use this method of legal immigration to come to America.

    The United States rightly and justly welcomed Trump's forebears and is now welcoming his wife's European parents the same way. Why is Trump so eager to pull up the welcome mat for millions of non-European parents, siblings and adult children of US citizens who wish to continue to be able to come to America legally using the same method?

    Why is making drastic cutbacks in non-white legal immigration so important to Trump that he is continuing to hold the Dreamers hostage to this racially motivated agenda - and, cynically, blame the opposition party when he begins to deport the Dreamers, as he undoubtedly will if the Democrats and other immigration advocates do not bow down to his imperial demand?

    The Hill's
    latest report is at:

    http://thehill.com/latino/375279-tru...abandoned-daca
    __________________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 30 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain H-1B and other work visas, as well as employment and family-based green cards. His email address is algaselex@gmail.com

    Updated 02-28-2018 at 02:29 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: